Ask Chuck Kennedy

[m_conners]

Chuck,

Do you think the ratings system will end up going "real-time" at some point in the future?

The ratings system is already a fantastic system, just wondering if you ever see the possibility of a real time ratings system...

Thanks man,

mc

[ck34]

Short answer is 'No.' I think you'll see improvements to the online unofficial ratings based on improvements for TDs to post results and improved "correctness" in terms of course layouts being entered properly. We are also working on a way to keep the unofficial round ratings up there until the official ones get processed so there's not a "dark" period inbetween.

Since TDs are allowed up to 30 days to get reports in and still some do not meet that deadline, this is the real time lag in the system we can't improve. If we process events any faster, the rating sequence of events will get more out of order than it already is. By spacing out the updates, there's time for Dave to get most of the reports for events hosted during a certain time period processed at the same time.

The process requires manual checking of properly filled out reports. There's no easy way to get around proper assigning of course layouts to each division who played them. We can sometimes guess but we really have to mostly rely on the TD to get that right. That's the Achilles heel of the process and the one most likely to generate wrong values.

We catch a lot of the mistakes before events are processed with our semi-automated process. If we automated the process further, more bad results would go out and we'd just have to go back and correct them after they were posted more than we do now.

One cool thing that a volunteer might write is a "What If" program either for the web or for someone to download that allows players to load in their new unofficial values and have it estimate their rating. Disc Golf United already has realtime updating of your handicap where you can enter your results as you get them. That's the closest you can get to seeing your rating or handicap after every round at the moment.

[sandalman]

would the calculation behind such a tool be simply to calc the SD, determine if any rounds should be dropped, determine which rounds get doubled, then do the calc with proper inclusions and weightings? anything i am missing?

[ck34]

I think this would be an option available after a person brings up their current Ratings Detail. They would click the 'What If' button and their current round ratings and dates would be listed. They could then enter as many round ratings and dates as they wanted. No events even need to be listed or the round order within a day.

The logic for the calc would first eliminate rounds 12 months older than last date entered unless there were fewer than 8. Then the number of rounds to be doubled would be determined and which ones. If only one of two on a date was to be doubled, choose the higher rated one. Then, the SD is calculated to see if any rounds are knocked out. (This is the way Roger does it now but I think the SD knock out should be done first before the doubling.)

Then calc the average. The primary thing that's slightly different is that the round ratings have already been rounded. The other item is that the number of props may increase with people renewing since the time an event posted unofficial ratings and when the official ones are done. This happens all of the time early in the year.

[sandalman]

ok boyz'n'girlz, herre is something. it is basic, no frills, but pretty darn accurate.

ratings calculator

its an excel spreadsheet... just replace my data with your own and boom, out comes your anticipated rating.

ideas = welcome

[m_conners]

Very cool!

[AviarX]

wow Pat, that is awesome and user-friendly. you are a pretty cool guy for someone who likes the 2 meter rule and throws Discraft

i'll use it to see if my predictions using old math were correct... thanks again

[ck34]

Calculator looks good. Two tweaks needed are: (1) The 2.5SD is capped at 100 maximum. (2) you need to use the ROUNDUP function because 14 will be doubled with 53 rounds, not 13.

[sandalman]

double post removed

[sandalman]

triple post removed

[AviarX]

Chuck, have you ever considered dropping late penalties and wrong score penalties from total scores for rounds only for the purpose of calculating round ratings (not to calculate total score relative to other competitors at an event)? Or have you considered dropping those penalties when calculating course SSA's? just curious.

[ck34]

Chuck, have you ever considered dropping late penalties and wrong score penalties from total scores for rounds only for the purpose of calculating round ratings

Yes we have. The question we had was whether this might be a typical behavior for the player or not. If so, then it should be part of their rating because they might be prone to this error every so often. We weren't smart enough to divine one time situations versus a pattern so we've left it in there, let alone the hassle of TDs having to flag scores on TD reports. Remember that players who shoot more than 60 points below their rating are excluded from the SSA calc. So if someone is late by two holes, there's a good chance that score may not be used for the SSA even if it isn't low enough to get excluded from that player's rating average.

[AviarX]

Remember that players who shoot more than 60 points below their rating are excluded from the SSA calc. So if someone is late by two holes, there's a good chance that score may not be used for the SSA even if it isn't low enough to get excluded from that player's rating average.

i thought a round had to be 2.5 STD below the rating for the rounds used in determining the rating for it to be dropped? If i have a round 60 points or more less than my rating is it automatically dropped?

also is it 60 points less than the rating at the time the round was shot or 60 points less than the rating the round shot figures into?

[ck34]

You're missing the sequence here. The SSA for each round is temporarily calculated based on the scores and ratings of propagators. If a propagator shoots a round with an unofficial rating more than 60 points below their rating, then they are excluded from producing the SSA calculation, but not from getting a rating for that round.

Once the SSA is calculated from propagators with acceptable round ratings, everyone who played that layout will get a round rating from that SSA regardless whether they are a propagator or not, or a member or not.

[oceanjones]

Chuck, I know it's been brought up before, but...I would love to see the averages for a tourney on our player information page. I know its a pretty quick calculation to do ourselves, but it would be so much easier if there were just a TA (Tourney Average) column. I really like knowing those averages, they are a much more accurate indicator than finishing places. (Just because I place "well" at one tourney doesn't mean I will at the next, sometimes I don't notice all the high rated players and wonder..."Now why did I tank so badly...I didn't feel like I was tanking.")

[ck34]

I'm not sure what averages you are referring to? Something like the average round ratings for the person taking last cash? The average score or SSA for the course layout?

The major problem is that linking this back to the player pages with unofficial results doesn't make sense when scores are first posted because TDs aren't held to any quality posting standards beyond getting the scores correct. In fact, we'd rather they spend their time getting the TD report done and sent in rather than do a complex course layout online for an event like the BG Ams for example.

Once the event is processed with official ratings, the SSAs for each round are posted with the Course Stats link on the tournament results page. We're working on getting those linked back to the Course Directory but I'm not sure what the status is on that.

[Parkntwoputt]

In fact, we'd rather they spend their time getting the TD report done and sent in rather than do a complex course layout online for an event like the BG Ams for example.

If the correct round ratings are not going to be used for BG Am's then all the ratings for this event should be thrown out.

The ratings are all for one course for each round. It basically shows that every player played the exact same course for all four rounds. Impossible since there were 8 courses used.

Sure this is confusing, but they got it right for the BG Open. If they cannot get it right for the BG Am's throw them out. I don't care if my round rating was high or low, but if it is not correct then it is not the truth about how I played.

Quality is better then quantity in this point.

[ck34]

BG Ams is being done properly for the official ratings. But it's more complicated to do the unofficial ratings properly with the online software than it is to do the TD report correctly.

[Alacrity]

Kris,

Have you done this before? You can define the courses for the "on-line" scoring and it will calculate differently for each Pool on each course, but it is cumbersome and occasionally odd things will occur. For instance, I have seen a proper setup for the on-line scoring and one pool did not get a rating for one round. The on-line scoring is nice, but it is only an estimate. I have a scoring spreadsheet that is being used by many TD's and it also calculates an estimated round rating, but once again, if it is not setup properly, the estimates can be off by quite a bit.

As long as the TD report is correct the rounds will be calculated correctly.

If the correct round ratings are not going to be used for BG Am's then all the ratings for this event should be thrown out.

The ratings are all for one course for each round. It basically shows that every player played the exact same course for all four rounds. Impossible since there were 8 courses used.

Sure this is confusing, but they got it right for the BG Open. If they cannot get it right for the BG Am's throw them out. I don't care if my round rating was high or low, but if it is not correct then it is not the truth about how I played.

Quality is better then quantity in this point.

[dananarama]

As you may have already noticed, there appears to be a problem with the ratings calculated for the Greater Des Moines Challenge in round 3 for intermediate players. The men have a rating that is clearly too high, and the women don't have a rating calculated at all.

I appreciate the boost my player rating got from this, but thought I should bring it to your attention.

[ck34]

I checked our correction list and it was listed as a potential issue but it must not have been corrected.

[dananarama]

Thanks for looking into it.

In a separate issue, it appears that the rounds from the Mighty MO (4/29) are not being used in the player ratings calculation. Could you check into this also?

[krupicka]

Chuck- It appears that when choosing the last 25% of rounds to double that the morning round is chosen over an afternoon round. For example: If all tournaments played were 2/day and a player played 12 rounds, the double weighted rounds would be from the last tournament plus the first round of the previous tournament. What's up with that?

I would think either the afternoon round should be chosen or that the 25% should be expanded to include the entire day of rounds.

[dananarama]

Will these two issues be addressed before the next ratings update?

[UncleBob]

Hi Chuck
I am trying to get in touch with Chris Himming. If you could find out I would appreciate it. My email is bobntrumann@yahoo.com. All i need is his email, of course a phone number to australia would be helpful.
Thanks
Uncle Bob

[cgkdisc]

I don't have that info. Please contact PDGA office or perhaps some of the Texas people like those at Millennium may have that.

[LStephens]

Chuck,

I have a question about how ratings are calculated on events that are just now coming in from earlier in the year. You and I played in The Parklane Open and it is just now showing up on my stats page. The round ratings are yet to be calculated until the next update.

The question is...will these round ratings be rated using the player ratings the day of the tournament?...or will they be calculated using the current player rating?

[cgkdisc]

Current ratings are used. Otherwise, your previous ratings at each update in your history, since that event, would have to be updated each time we did ratings updates.

[ck34]

This thread went somewhat adrift from your question, Mike. I'm not sure realtime is realistically in the future. However, I can see adding more regular updates than 5 per year, possibly in 2007.

[m_conners]

This thread went somewhat adrift from your question, Mike. I'm not sure realtime is realistically in the future. However, I can see adding more regular updates than 5 per year, possibly in 2007.

This thread is providing some good ratings talk, thanks Chuck! I now understand how real time ratings would tough to achieve.